Friday, 9 May 2008

Cold fusion

By JonThm on Jonathan Thomason

I was taught in 1985, that doing electrolysis with Pt electrodes gave off gamma radiation. 15 years later, it was decided that this was due to cold fusion.
This was a mild form of molecular nuclear fusion: Where we use a FCC catalyst in hot water, to do electric molecular nuclear fusion. Think of it this way, it is a very weak way of doing nuclear fusion. The technology that changes how the world works this century.
A far better way was suggested to me by Prof. Zimmerman, who has published articles on the phantom science of Global Warming.
He is now a skeptic, and has never showed me what he wrote, only saying ‘We were all doing it’. Lemmings and cliffs comes to mind!
We pass steam up a Ti helix. How we generate this steam I am not sure, but the Windscale kettle, steam plasma tubes and hydrogen burners are all possible routes.
The hydrogen flame does molecular nuclear fusion, as we get steam in turbulent flow: So hydrogen flames are the easiest way to do nuclear fusion on Earth.
As the steam passes up the helix, we get catalyzed turbulence, steam fusion. This is 1,000 times as powerful as hot water molecular nuclear fusion.
Annoyingly, all this was taught to me on my degree at Sheffield University, UK in 1982-86.
So the steam emerges at the top, with useful super heat. We can use this heat to boil off water, doing boiling molecular nuclear fusion. Then we return the steam to the base of the helix.
Or we can use Prof. Zimmerman’s idea of a double helix, to eat u pa gas.
Either way, nuclear fusion is easy. This gives heat, with no CO2 or toxic death. We produce a whiff of He.
But the deep sea does so much deep molecular nuclear fusion; our production of He3 will not be noticed by nature.
Mind you, with CO2 levels at 0.00037% max, nature does not notice it either.
I have seen data with higher CO2 levels, but the source has not been re corded. At 120 ppm, plants would grow 50 times quicker than they did in 1980.
This would make cutting the grass very hard! It would mean life on Earth would have increased 50 fold.
This has not happened: So higher CO2 levels are basically lies, designed to continue academic research into the phantom science of Global Warming.
Or give it another name: Total lies.

No comments: